Brock Turner was a spoiled rich kid and star athlete who thought he could do anything he wanted. Notice that he didn’t cut a plea bargain. He went to trial. He tried to get away with it. He was hoping that finger-raping a college girl would bring him NO criminal sanctions at all. He didn’t admit his guilt. The jury found that he concocted a lie about “consent” after the fact, when there never was any consent and couldn’t have been.
A rapist that tries to lie his way out of the consequences of his crime– does he deserve the same sentence as the guy who admits doing it, apologizes to the victim, to the community, and asks the Court for mercy?
I’m outraged that he only served 6 months. I think he should have served 3 full years in prison, THEN gone on probation for several more. Instead of having to start his life over as a more mature adult who got a serious slap down that he well and truly deserved, he got what the victim called a “soft time out” with a short stint in jail followed by probation. And that’s entirely due to the judge’s sentence. It’s not like the judge gave Turner 3 years and he made parole after just 6 months (which is common for youthful offenders).
Anyhow, since the judge imposed the sentence that was recommended by the probation department following a pre-sentence investigation, and that’s very common for judges to follow those recommendations of the parole department, there’s no reason to recall Judge Persky. But it’s perfectly appropriate for the people to elect judges that reflect their values and morals and will hand down a sentence that fits the community’s sense of outrage at the crime, as long as that sentence is within the statutory range and is constitutional.